February 14, 2012

For The Cynical And Skeptical Among Us

Back on the contraception front, two stray thoughts vex me.

1. Did Obama need this fight in order to re-bond with the anti-religious left? Maybe his evolution on endorsing gay marriage has been deferred until after the election, so he needed to establish his anti-church cred with this.

2. We write of Missing Persons - in the tick-tock about the decision-making process on the contraception rule and the narrow religious exemption, we hear about Kathleen Sebelius, Melody Barnes, and Valerie Jarrett,all of whom have obvious roles to play based ontheir position in the org chart.

But nowhere do we learn whether a woman who once pulled down $300,000 per year to advise a hospital on public health issues chimed in on this debate. Given her background, why wouldn't she? (And does anyone doubt where she would come out?)

Comments

"In 1981, she left for Princeton, an overwhelmingly white institution that cherished its genteel traditions. She was one of 94 black freshmen in a class of over 1,100. Catherine Donnelly, a white student from New Orleans, was a roommate. Her mother spent months pleading with Princeton officials to give her daughter a white roommate instead. “Mom just blew a gasket when I described Michelle,” Ms. Donnelly recalled. “It was my secret shame.”"

She's angry? Why? Didn't her studies tell her how to be like Jackie Robinson, and learn to love the hate?

OK, please do not ding the First Lady for not tangling herself in policy. The idea that, somehow, we need family to help out the person we elect is one of the more obnoxious things to come out of the Clinton administration.

Like with Remnick, the skill at masking
unethical practices, is remarkable, from
that passage;

Like many urban hospitals, the medical center’s emergency room becomes clogged with people who need primary care. So Mrs. Obama trained counselors, mostly local blacks, to hand out referrals to health clinics lest black patients felt they were being shooed away.

She also altered the hospital’s research agenda. When the human papillomavirus vaccine, which can prevent cervical cancer, became available, researchers proposed approaching local school principals about enlisting black teenage girls as research subjects.

TomM -- you're a little naive here. Of course bigg butt Michelle told 'Bam to stick it to the Catholics, the Lutherans, the Mormons and anyone else who has conscience objections to sterilization, the Pill and abortion. BUT!!!! that was no biggie to 'Bam; that's in line with everything's he's heard from his Mom, the fancy pants Honolulu Prep school, Occidental, Columbia, Harvard and the Left-Wing 'minister' on the South side of ChiTown. There was nothing controversial about this, everybody in the echo chamber was saying the same thing. The only question was how to dress it up politically.

Dick Morris, via Rush Limbaugh, is reminding everyone of the debate where Stephe was grilling Romney about contraceptives. I remember wondering at the time why they were bringing it up. Now we know. Stephe was preparing the ground work for Obama.

Pardon me for being a little literal, but to assume the First Lady had influence on this decision is not supported by any evidence. And if there was some pillow talk advice -- who has not accepted that in their life from time to time. But, in this case, the First Lady is not out there promoting the position, she is not, a la Hillary, representing herself as a policy advisor on anything besides eating yer vegetables.

In other words, Puhleeez. There are so many obnoxious people who are responsible for this decision. Why drag the First Lady into it. Next thing you know, you'll try to take away her right to bare arms...

No, there is no direct evidence that I know of, Appalled. But it't not like everyone here hasn't speculated about this or that at one point or another, yourself included.

Next thing you know, you'll try to take away her right to bare arms...

LOL. Incidentally, you may have noted that we were treated to photos of the "guns" a lot less frequently in calendar year 2011 than we were in 2010 and 2009. Somebody's finally figured out that they are no longer as endearing to the general public as they were once thought to be.

A number of people have suggested this. I'm willing to chalk it up to coincidence, and the never-ending effort of the media to say "Look, a squirrel!" rather than talk about the economy or the Middle East. If Steph wanted to prepare groundwork he wouldn't have framed the question in terms of a state's power to ban contraceptives vs. the right to privacy, which is really at the other end of the issue from the landmine Obama has stepped on.

In other words, in a contest between stupidity and deviousness, I'll opt for the former in this case. There is no end to the supply of idiotic "out from left field" questions from the MSM in the debates, and this one just happened to have the buzz word "contraceptives."

I'm having a hard time believing there are more anti-religious left motivated by this than Catholics who are irritated by it. (But I suspect the numbers of both are relatively small: the hard lefties were Obama's anyway, and most Catholics don't really care about contraception.) The problem is that a relatively small shift in Catholic votes in battleground states (e.g., PA) could mean the margin of victory. I'm not seeing anything similar for the nutroot base.

"Nearly 3 out of every 10 workers in Hawaii (29.7%), Alaska (29.6%), and the District of Columbia (29.1%) work for federal, state, or local government, at a time when government employment is declining nationally at all levels. Pennsylvania has the lowest percentage of government workers, at 11.8%."

Just to summarize how 'Bam has screwed the pouch beyond all recognition (HIS OWN especially), some numbers to ponder: 'Bam won the Catholic Vote 54-45 in 2008 (Catholics are 27% of the electorate); NOW 59% of Catholics negative on 'Bam 40+% STRONGLY Negative. Even if 'Bam gets a bunch of the currently somewhat negative and gets 45% of the Catholic vote, that flip of one voter patern makes it 51%-49% all things being equal as 2008, when conservative turnout was low. Second #: $4+/gal gas coming by Mem Day due to debased US Dollar and anti-drilling/refining policies by 'Bam. Why won' the entire electorate (except for blacks ) look like that 55-45%? -- how bad will 'Bam lose white evangelicals? 'Bam get 46+% in November-- that's still my prediction.

Cecil Turner-- very good point about Catholic vote in Pa., I would add Ohio and NJ to that-- yes, there may be hope in NJ.
JimmyK-- I think white evagelicals, and Lutherans, even observant Jews, are just as appalled by the Obamacare mandate fiasco. This is a freedom issue not just the Bishops' self-insurance policies. The non-political are learning that we conservatives were right about the sinister anti-freedoam nature of Obamacare.

I give the edge to ECRI, with BOzo taking the brunt of the loss. NK's 46% for BOzo is really very optimistic. 42% is more likely and I believe the level of incompetence demonstrated continuously by the President may well be rewarded with 40%.

Just mentally walked through our neighborhood. Fellow next door (renter) is an unmarried military officer. The Fed pays $3,000 of his $3,300 monthly rent, he told me. Next to him, a federal administrator. Across the street, a school teacher married to a state-employed nurse. Up the block, a lawyer for state government. My own husband, a retired department head for government. Etc., etc. Nearly every household I think about has at least one fed, state or county employee or retiree in residence.

I've never worked for a government agency, but rse's link makes me wonder whether I shouldn't think about becoming a school lunchbox inspector. Sounds like I'd have lots of power over others -- always desirable -- plus likely a good retirement plan. It's the perfect job for an English major, otherwise unemployable.

Rick-- I don't see 42% for 'Bam because he will get 95% of the black vote (11+%), that gives him 10+% to start with, of the remaining 90% of the electorate -- he will win 40% that gives him the 46+% total. BTW this also shows why dems are permanently screwed. Blacks turned out big for 'Bam in 2008 (12% of electorate), fewer will turn out in 2012 and as long as conservatives turn out stronger than 2008 -- it's over. Blacks are the most reliable Dem voters, and 'Bam has ruined the Black liberal POTUS brand for a generation.

"Did Mitt Romney commit voter fraud when he cast a ballot for Scott Brown in last year's special election in Massachusetts? On Monday, one of his lesser known opponents for the GOP presidential nomination, Fred Karger, filed a complaint with Massachusetts state election officials alleging that he voted for Brown, as well as in other Massachusetts elections, when he was not in fact a resident of the Bay State."

“We see President Obama’s action Friday as significant, in that it appears to have been prompted by the many voices united in concern over an infringement of our religious liberties. But the ‘accommodation’ did not expand the exemption for religious employers, nor did it restrict the mandate in any way. It simply described a temporary enforcement delay and a possible future change—a change that, unfortunately, would not adequately protect religious freedom or unborn lives.

Well another Barb, if any of your neighbors (govt employ's or otherwise) are married, tell them to get divorced.

As for the Govt lunch Inspector guys. I know I can't fight City Hall, but If my daughter (allergic to milk) drinks milk mandated by the Fed's, can I then fight City Hall-Monitors?

Apologies Frau for the NPR link, but I just think of them as National Palestinian Radio and it makes it easier to stomach. BTW, did you guys see that on a day when Islamic Terrorists in Thailand blew their own legs off trying to kill Jews, that Oliver Stone's son just converted to the Religion O' Peace?

More #s-- here's a link to a chart Zero Hedge posted. Gas prices. The US enjoyed a 25 year run of strong economic performance (1982-2007) during a time of first declining (1982-1987) gas prices and then steady prices up until to 2002. Prices have TRIPLED since then and MPG has only improved marginally. Hence, young families' budgets are crushed -- several thousand dollars/year are lost to higher gas and heating costs. Gas/heating prices are causing STAGFLATION hire costs simultaneously suppressing demand and slowing economic growth. THIS is why non-political independents will go strongly against 'Bam. BTW-- since 'Bam was inaugurated, gas prices have DOUBLED. Best part -- 'Bam isn't primarily responsible for this. Bernanke and his QE debased Dollar and prior to that Greenspan's easy money policy are) 'Bam's deficit spending debacle and anti-drilling jihad made it worse, but he'll pay the whole price politically. The link:

I believe your turnout model for those who vote for a living is way too high. It will be very clear that BOzo has no chance fairly early and the amount of walking around money with which to purchase votes is going to be commensurate with BOzo's chances. I would also note that BOzo has done nothing for the Hispanic bloc (aside from nominating a Witless Latina) and I believe that we can anticipate repayment in full for his focus on "my people".

Matt-- it's quite simple DOLLAR DEBASEMENT. Oil/Barrel is the same today as 1990 -- IN SILVER terms, and much cheaper in GOLD terms. The price has tripled in Dollar terms because of Dollar debasement starting in 2002, and going into hyper debasement in 2009 with QE (look at the chart in that ZH link). There are some speculative factors because of the Mad Mullahs and 'Bam' anti-drilling jihad. But the fundemental reason for Oil inflation is the FED--- the freakin' US Fed enabling the obscene increase of US debt by Dollar debasement. Ron Paul is everyone's crazy uncle, but he's right about this.

Just got an email from Pete Hegseth, Veterans for Freedom, saying he is home in Minnesota, mustered out of active duty and back from Afghanistan. He is considering running for Senate against Amy Klobuchar. If he gets in this will be a interesting primary and he wins that an even far more interesting general election. Pete is a Princeton grad and on leave of absence from his Master's in Public Policy from JFK School at Harvard.

After attacking hedge funds and their managers during her tenure in the Obama administration, Anita Dunn is now working as a public relations consultant to improve the industry’s image, according to a secret proposal obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

Dunn, formerly the interim White House communications director for the Obama administration and currently a managing director at the Democratic consulting firm SKDKnickerbocker (SKDK), is being promoted by the public relations firm McLean/Clark LLC as a director of “paid media” for a pro-hedge-fund campaign. The project is described by promotional material as a “comprehensive public affairs operation” to “raise awareness about the positive role hedge funds play in the American economy” and to “eliminate the need for politicians to take aim at hedge funds.”

As White House communications director, Dunn helped President Obama criticize hedge funds as a key factor of the financial collapse—and she has continued that criticism, at least in public, ever since.

An industry outsider who was pitched on Dunn’s proposal told the Washington Free Beacon that he was surprised to see the former Obama official involved in the effort. “First we see Dunn attack us on television,” he said, “and then she tells us to hire her to head off the exact attacks that she herself is hurling at us. The entire thing begins to stink like a protection racket.”

The other amazing coincidence is that last Sunday's first reading at mass was the Book of Kings story of the Queen of Sheba. Sort of like the way Steph pre-empted the current debate with his question on contraception.

Clarice- fantastic video from Milwaukee 1947. The Trolley Track plow and snow thrower were way cool. Modern versions of that equipment can be found today in places like Montreal, where within a couple of hours of a 5" snowfall all major streets are clear.

While I'm jealous that we don't have our own Media Matters, does anyone know what it takes to challenge their 501(c)(3) designation? Can a citizen raise issue with the IRS? Do we need congressional hearings?

Btw, I'm betting that they can skate due to not supporting particular candidates, or other technicalities in the Code. I just want to see them dragged through the mud.

To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.

Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are commonly referred to as charitable organizations. Organizations described in section 501(c)(3), other than testing for public safety organizations, are eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions in accordance with Code section 170.

The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, and no part of a section 501(c)(3) organization's net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. If the organization engages in an excess benefit transaction with a person having substantial influence over the organization, an excise tax may be imposed on the person and any organization managers agreeing to the transaction.

Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct. For a detailed discussion, see Political and Lobbying Activities. For more information about lobbying activities by charities, see the article Lobbying Issues; for more information about political activities of charities, see the FY-2002 CPE topic Election Year Issues.

ISFAHAN, Iran - US filmmaker Sean Stone, the son of Oscar-winning director Oliver Stone, said Tuesday that he converted to Islam in Iran, where he is making a documentary. "The conversion to Islam is not abandoning Christianity or Judaism, which I was born with. It means I have accepted Muhammad and other prophets," he said in a brief telephone call from the central Iranian city of Isfahan, where he underwent the ceremony. Sean Stone's famous father is Jewish, while his mother is Christian. The 27-year-old filmmaker did not say why he converted.

Posted by: Danube of Thought | February 14, 2012 at 12:18 PM"

bold mine. Nobody is born a Christian. A person can be raised in a Christian home...but they personally must choose themselves.
Oliver's son should go write for "On Faith" at the WaPo. He can use a lot of religious terms, but he doesn't need to know what the hell he's talking about. perfect fit.

"We bishops are pastors, we're not politicians, and you can't compromise on principle," said Cardinal-designate Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "And the goal posts haven't moved and I don't think there's a 50-yard line compromise here," he added.

"We're in the business of reconciliation, so it's not that we hold fast, that we're stubborn ideologues, no. But we don't see much sign of any compromise," he said.

"What (Obama) offered was next to nothing. There's no change, for instance, in these terribly restrictive mandates and this grossly restrictive definition of what constitutes a religious entity," he said. "The principle wasn't touched at all."

Hmmmmm. Okay, lawyers out there, can the Church file an amicus brief for the ObamaCare opponents with the SCOTUS? If this doesn't get overturned, the whole stinking mess, then as I understand Clarice's point, the Church will have to wait until the regulations are "ripe" which is actually 2 years off for that, right?

WEPCO's original business model was to supply electrictiy for the street cars only. They purposedly designed their corporate office building on W. Michigan to be easily converted to a hotel if this new thing called electricity never panned out:)

1) “Grimes was described by the Los Angeles Times in 1990 as “North America’s best-known researcher on RU-486,

2) “Raymond works for Gynuity Health Projects, which states that it “works globally to ensure that reproductive health technologies are available at reasonable cost.” Raymond’s bio notes that she considers abortion to be a “centerpiece of health issues for women,’”

Was that part of the pro-Abortion, pro Birth Control campaign? You got me, but sure seems coincidental.

Another question that struck me as odd in the debates was the questioning of Rick Santorum about was he opposed to Puerto Rican statehood.

Where did that one come from? Is there some pending Presidential move to push for PR Statehood in order to somehow appeal to Hispanics? I sure wouldn't put that, nor a proposal for DC Statehood far from Obama. Couch it in terms of Left wing Fairness and right Wing unfairness and simply let Media Matters do it's thing.